Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Wayland Meets Some Summer Love w/ New Changes

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,130

    Default Wayland Meets Some Summer Love w/ New Changes

    Phoronix: Wayland Meets Some Summer Love w/ New Changes

    Last week we openly asked the question if and when will X12 emerge to replace X11, which was met by a variety of responses. Some view the Wayland Display Server as being a potential successor to the current X11 / X.Org Server, but others don't give it much credit seeing as it's not too actively worked on -- well, directly, but it leverages a lot of work actively going on with the Mesa and kernel DRM. The last time the Wayland Display Server received new commits to its code-base was back in March, but that changed this weekend...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODMyNA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Great. Now the Wayland fanboys will be back out in force here on Phoronix. Can't wait!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siride View Post
    Great. Now the Wayland fanboys will be back out in force here on Phoronix. Can't wait!
    Why can't wait? Can't get a life?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Well well. Wasn't it supposed to be 'just a playground to try the new DRI2'?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    5

    Default

    It would b great to have an alternative to X but it seems that the development is too slow to make that happen in foreseeable future.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by siride View Post
    Great. Now the Wayland fanboys will be back out in force here on Phoronix. Can't wait!
    'Fanboys' wanting to push their opinion versus you wanting to push yours.

    If you would not want to push yours than you would simply blindly ignore them.

    But I still do not see why Wayland would suck. If the GTK and Qt toolkits are ported and altered to be widget network transparant and use already available SSH connections, then what the hell is the problem? Well... Xlib is, but it is not as if Xlib and other X.org source is not available. Hell if Wine can make *NIX compatible with Microsoft Windows (for crying out loud) it should be doable.

    Minimalism, simplicity and strictly modern functionality just kicks ass. What if Wayland would be runnable, GTK/Qt would be widget network transparant and ported it could already exist alongside of X.org. And in the end if backwards compatibility in form of a seperate parser comes around...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    'Fanboys' wanting to push their opinion versus you wanting to push yours.
    My opinion happens to be shared by many X developers and other people who know what they are talking about, so...

    If you would not want to push yours than you would simply blindly ignore them.

    But I still do not see why Wayland would suck. If the GTK and Qt toolkits are ported and altered to be widget network transparant and use already available SSH connections, then what the hell is the problem? Well... Xlib is, but it is not as if Xlib and other X.org source is not available. Hell if Wine can make *NIX compatible with Microsoft Windows (for crying out loud) it should be doable.
    Right, but it's not that simple. The toolkits haven't even been ported to XCB yet and XCB is the same protocol, just a different (more efficient) API. Also, Wayland isn't even an API yet. It's just a playground that kind of supports some things. I'm sure it won't look as pretty and orthogonal once it has to do all the things that are needed of a mature graphics system. It's easy to throw together a compositor that doesn't use X. That's barely even exciting. I want to see a system that can actually power a full Unix desktop stack. Until then, it's just a playground for things that ought to be ported to X.

    Minimalism, simplicity and strictly modern functionality just kicks ass. What if Wayland would be runnable, GTK/Qt would be widget network transparant and ported it could already exist alongside of X.org. And in the end if backwards compatibility in form of a seperate parser comes around...
    All of these things can be gotten by fixing X. Fixing X slowly over time also allows for the currently minimal manpower to actually achieve the goal of having a nice X. All the good parts can be reused and all the cruft can be deprecated and the new things that we learn from Wayland or elsewhere can be introduced. After all, render, composite, EXA, AIGLX, etc. were introduced this way, have stabilized and are now quite successful. 6 years ago, X couldn't do any of those things. Meanwhile, Y windows, Berlin, etc. all failed. What does that say to you?

    Throwing all your money in with Wayland, which is being worked on -- occasionally -- by one guy, doesn't seem like a smart bet either.

    Also, what does "widget network transparant[sic]" mean? There's no such thing as a "widget network".

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    6 years ago, X couldn't do any of those things. Meanwhile, Y windows, Berlin, etc. all failed. What does that say to you?
    Projects created out of X.org frustration but never materialised becuase it didn't had any other goal other than not being X.org...

    Throwing all your money in with Wayland, which is being worked on -- occasionally -- by one guy, doesn't seem like a smart bet either.
    I have no idea what a single developper has to do with any of this. If one wants to make shit possible, they make shit possible. It is an idea, a concept, an abstract and all I know is that it is:
    A) Not ready yet;
    B) Not done yet.
    So?

    Whilst X.Org might be a good foundation for todays systems, it appears to be horribly complex. Wouldn't be the first time we hear the "need more devs", while new kids on the block can't figure it out, but that's just what I heared...

    Also, what does "widget network transparant[sic]" mean? There's no such thing as a "widget network".
    From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_transparency
    "Network Transparency in its most general sense refers to the ability of a protocol to transmit data over the network in a manner which is transparent (invisible) to those using the applications that are using the protocol.

    The term is often applied in the context of the X Window System which is able to transmit graphical data over the network and integrate it seamlessly with applications running and displaying locally."


    So what I mean by network transparant widgets is that instead of client->server pixmap delivery, the client could send "1 button here, 2 button there, text there and this there", saving an insane amount of bandwith... And this would suck if one would have a client-server setup locally, but if you have Wayland server only, and Qt/Gtk taking care of the client role (automaticaly compatible with other instances; X.org/Wayland/XFree86), this would be eliminated.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    Projects created out of X.org frustration but never materialised becuase it didn't had any other goal other than not being X.org...
    The Wayland fanboys kind of fall into that same position...

    I have no idea what a single developper has to do with any of this. If one wants to make shit possible, they make shit possible. It is an idea, a concept, an abstract and all I know is that it is:
    A) Not ready yet;
    B) Not done yet.
    So?
    Well, things don't get done if nobody is around to do them. It's already bad enough that X.org has limited manpower. How is Wayland supposed to get done or work if there is only one guy working on it? It matters a whole lot.

    Whilst X.Org might be a good foundation for todays systems, it appears to be horribly complex. Wouldn't be the first time we hear the "need more devs", while new kids on the block can't figure it out, but that's just what I heared...
    The Linux kernel is also very complex, but I see few cries for trashing it and starting over again, nor is there a problem with manpower. X doesn't need to start over, it needs manpower and support for companies, like the kernel has, or GNOME/KDE, etc. Any large system is going to end up seeming "horribly complex". That's the reality of mature software.

    From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_transparency
    "Network Transparency in its most general sense refers to the ability of a protocol to transmit data over the network in a manner which is transparent (invisible) to those using the applications that are using the protocol.

    The term is often applied in the context of the X Window System which is able to transmit graphical data over the network and integrate it seamlessly with applications running and displaying locally."


    So what I mean by network transparant widgets is that instead of client->server pixmap delivery, the client could send "1 button here, 2 button there, text there and this there", saving an insane amount of bandwith... And this would suck if one would have a client-server setup locally, but if you have Wayland server only, and Qt/Gtk taking care of the client role (automaticaly compatible with other instances; X.org/Wayland/XFree86), this would be eliminated.
    Terrible, terrible idea. So much of what a toolkit does is very client-specific. With your system, instead of just diddling around with things on the client-side (i.e., function calls), you have to send messages to the server and wait for responses in many cases. How would you deal with subclassing? Owner draw? What about new custom widgets that don't derive from existing widgets? And how could you leverage the object-oriented hierarchy of widgets when that is all hidden on the Wayland server? It quickly becomes a mess. Plus, it doesn't buy you anything. You still have to communicate with the server. You still have to micromanage things on the server (except with your system, you have to micromanage even more). You still have to listen for and handle events.

    The fact that all other OSes have client-side toolkits should tell you something about the way things should be done...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    9

    Default

    There is new git tree qt-wayland.
    http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~jbarnes/qt-wayland/?h=4.7

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •